Whether a new theory raised on appeal in support of a suppression motion is reviewable for plain error or under Rule 12's good-cause standard

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 12(c)(3) provides that certain pretrial motions are “untimely” if not raised by the deadline set by the district court, but “a court may consider the defense, objection, or request if the party shows good cause.” In this case, petitioner timely moved to suppress the search warrants that permitted the search of his home and computers, but the Ninth Circuit concluded that his challenge to the local warrant based on a lack of probable cause had not been expressly raised in his motion to suppress and that his argument was waived as a result under Rule 12. This petition thus presents the following questions for review: 1. When a defendant raises a new theory on appeal in support of a suppression motion filed in district court—in this case, a lack of probable cause for a search warrant—is the argument reviewable for plain error, as the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Eleventh Circuits have held, or does Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 12’s good-cause standard displace the plain-error standard in Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 52(b), as the First, Second, Third, Seventh, Eighth, Ninth, and Tenth Circuits have held? 2. Whether, contrary to the Ninth Circuit’s decision here, a search warrant which fails to allege that the subject has accessed or even attempted to access child pornography, but merely had accessed a website in which child pornography was apparently available, fails to establish probable cause to search the subject’s home and computers for evidence of child pornography, as the Second, Fourth, and Tenth Circuit have held. i PARTIES AND PROCEEDINGS All